CRM-M- IN Sabdar and Vers State of Ha CORAM: Present: AARADHN 1. 25.6.2025 Station Gha of anticipat 2. noticed her of Pawan S poultry farm 17.1.2025, -40957-2024 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGA ar and another Versus of Haryana AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA Mr. Sanjeev Majra, Advocate Ms. Shweta Nahata, Deputy A Ms. Jasleen Kaur, Advocate fo **** ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) Petitioners, who are accuse 25, under Sections 318(4), 316(2), Gharaunda, District Karnal, have ticipatory bail. Relevant facts as emerging fr ed hereinbelow:- Proceedings in the present cas an Singh, son of Sukhbir Singh, al farm in village Staundi having 2500 025, complainant contacted Sabdar 1- PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-40957-2024 Date of Decision: 28.10.2025 …Petitioners. …Respondent. CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. ocate for the petitioner. puty Advocate General, Haryana. cate for the complainant. ccused in case FIR No. 371 date 16(2), 61 of BNS, registered at Polic filed the present petition for gra ging from the documents on record b t case were initiated on the complai h, alleging therein that he (C) had 25000 birds along with a godown. O dar and Naved (petitioners herein) .2025 dated t Police or grant cord be plaint had a n. On ein) to GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.01 13:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- sell the de gave Rs.5 l time when complainan all the deb lakhs at th Rs.7 lakhs the petition complainan course of i Sections 41 registered a 3. for grant o Karnal, wh Aggrieved 4. have been f a criminal c illegal mon the story as only allega conditions next submi needed but -40957-2024 -2 e debris/waster material for a sum s.5 lakhs as security and agreed to hen the waste material and articles inant received Rs.12 lakhs in two i debris of the poultry farm and pro at the time of Eid. However, accus khs but the said cheque was dishono titioners that they would deposit inant again deposited the cheque wh On the basis of complaint of investigation, formal case vide F s 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B o red against petitioner. Apprehending their arrest, th rant of pre-arrest bail before the lea , which came to be dismissed in ieved of which, the present petition ha Learned counsel for the petiti been falsely implicated in the present minal colour only with a view to haras al monetary benefits from them. Furth tory as portrayed by complainant is tak allegation against the petitioners is itions of the contract and did not abid submits that though custodial interr but they are willing to join the inve 2- sum of Rs.27 lakhs. The petitione d to pay the remaining amount at th ticles would be lifted. After that, th wo installments and the accused lifte promised to pay the amount of Rs ccused Naved gave him a cheque honoured. On the assurance given b sit the amount in the account, th e which was again dishonoured. int and documents collected durin ide FIR No. 73 dated 6.4.2017, und B of Indian Penal Code, came to b est, the petitioners filed an applicatio the learned Additional Sessions Judg ed in terms of order dated 28.7.202 tion has been filed. petitioners submits that the petitione resent case. Civil dispute has been give harass the petitioners as also to extra Further, as per learned counsel, even t is taken to be true at its face value, th ers is that they violated the terms an ot abide by the same. Learned couns interrogation of the petitioners is n he investigation as and when called fo ioners at the at, the lifted f Rs.3 que of ven by t, the during under to be lication s Judge, .2025. titioners en given ract ven if alue, the rms and counsel s is not lled for. GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.01 13:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- Thus, it ha the petition 5. counsel for petitioners the petition initial amo inasmuch a The ‘dishon fact that ch “insufficien dismissal o 6. documents 7. -40957-2024 -3 , it has been prayed that the concessio etitioners be confirmed. Per contra, learned State co sel for the complainant submit that c ioners is needed to recover the money etitioners though agreed to lift debris l amount but subsequently did not a uch as though they lifted articles bu ‘dishonest intention’ on the part of th that cheques issued by them were re fficient funds”. On these grounds, issal of the petition. Heard learned counsel for ments on record. On 31.7.2025, following order “This is a petition for anticip Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha bearing FIR No. 371 dated 316(2), 61 of BNS registere District Karnal. The case of the prosecu sold poultry farm articles for were paid in advance to the payment was to be made as a collected from the poultry accused did not make the com articles and the cheque got dis Counsel for the petiti total has been received by 3- ncession of interim bail granted to bo tate counsel accompanied by learne that custodial interrogation of both th money due to the complainant, for bo debris from the poultry farm and pa not abide by terms of the agreeme les but did not pay remaining amoun t of the petitioners is apparent from th re returned with the endorsement o nds, both the learned counsel pray fo l for the parties and perused order as passed:- nticipatory bail under Section 482 ksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 in ca 25.06.2025 under Sections 318(4 tered at Police Station Gharaund osecution is that the complainant ha for Rs.27 lakhs for which Rs.5 lakh the complainant and the rest of th as and when the articles were to b try farm. However, the petitioner complete payment while they lifted th dishonoured subsequently. titioners submits that Rs.17 lakhs by the complainant, however Rs.1 to both learned both the for both nd paid reement amount. rom the ment of pray for sed the 482 of case 18(4), unda, nt has lakhs of the to be oners- ted the khs in Rs.10 GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.01 13:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -40957-2024 -4 lakhs are yet to be receiv petitioners are willing and rea Notice of motion for 18. Mr. Tapan Masta, Add on behalf of the respondent-St complaints of similar nature a with the police, however no against them. Mr. Manoj Kumar Taya and has filed memorandum complainant, which is taken on Learned counsel for th May do so positively before th in advance to the learned coun In the meantime, the p before the SHO/Investigating to join investigation and in th be released on interim bail o satisfaction of SHO/Investig following conditions as envisa BNSS [erstwhile Section 438(2 i) that the petitioners shall interrogation by a police office ii) that the petitioners shall no inducement, threat or promis the facts of the case so as to such facts to the Court or to an iii) that the petitioners shall permission of the Court; iv) such other condition as m 3) of Section 480, as if the section.” 4- ceived. He further states that th ready to join the investigation. r 18.08.2025. Addl. A.G., Haryana, accepts notic State and states that about 07 to 0 re are pending against the petitione r no other FIR has been registere Taya, Advocate has put in appearanc um of appearance on behalf of th en on record. r the State seeks time to file repl re the next date of hearing with a cop counsel opposite. he petitioners are directed to appea ting Officer as and when called upo the event of their arrest, they sha il on their furnishing bail bonds to th estigating Agency, subject to th nvisaged under Section 482(2) of th 38(2) Cr.P.C.]:- hall make themselves available fo officer as and when required; ll not, directly or indirectly, make an omise to any person acquainted wi s to dissuade him/her from disclosin to any police officer; all not leave India without the prio as may be imposed under sub-sectio f the bail were granted under th at the notice to 08 ioners stered rance of the reply. a copy ppear upon shall to the o the of the le for ke any d with losing prior ection r that GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.01 13:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 8. petitioners 9. been recov petitioners, compliance view the ab also the fac the order da from where accordingly confirmed, Further, th required in the Investi tamper with the country 10. 28.10.2025 gbs -40957-2024 -5 Learned State counsel, on ioners have joined the investigation. Admittedly, though the amoun recovered, but as has been submit ners, factual matrix reveals that di liance of terms and conditions of th the above submissions made by learn the fact that the petitioners had joine rder dated 31.7.2025 passed by this Co where an inference can be drawn that rdingly, interim bail granted vide o irmed, subject to conditions as envisa er, the petitioners are directed to ired in further by way of written notice nvestigating Officer of this case upo er with the evidence nor will influenc ountry without prior permission of the The petition stands allowed. .2025 Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 5- l, on instructions, submits that th amount due to the complainant has n submitted by learned counsel for th dispute stems out of alleged non of the business contract. Keeping y learned counsel for the petitioners a ned the investigation consequent this Court and there is nothing on recor n that they (p) misused this concessio vide order dated 31.7.2025 is hereb envisaged under Section 482(2) BNS d to join investigation as and whe notice for such purpose to be served b se upon the petitioners; they will n fluence the witnesses and will not leav of the Court. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No hat the has not for the ed non- eping in oners as quent to n record cession eby BNSS. d when rved by will not ot leave NEY) GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.01 13:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document